The Most Obvious Lie of the Campaign

[BPSCG]

Letter to the editor, Lebanon, PA., Daily News (http://www.ldnews.com/letterseditor/ci_10436829):
As a Republican and strong McCain supporter in 2000, I was disappointed and saddened in 2004 when McCain permanently traded in his maverick credentials and sold out his principles to support George W. Bush. I now find it equally disturbing to see him gamble our security and future with a reckless choice for a running mate.

Gov. Sarah Palin clearly has a bright future in politics. She may even have the depth and diversity of experience to be a vice-presidential candidate four years from now.

The McCain ticket, with all of its newfound “freshness” and despite all of the claims, has quickly devolved into the politics-as-usual that we have come to expect in the last eight years. McCain and Palin quickly emerged from the rhetoric of their convention as the uniters of dividers.

I talk politics with a lot of people from all walks of life. I find it compelling that many of the ordinary Republicans I talk to understand that their families cannot afford another four years like the last eight. We all deserve better.

Christopher Tarsa
Lebanon

Tarsa is chairman of the Lebanon County Democratic Committee.
Makes you wonder about those people who call in to Air America talk shows claiming "I've been a Republican all my life but I'm voting for Obama..."

See "astroturfing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing)."

[Ysidro]

Well it is possible he was a Republican in 2000 and changed his mind during the 8 years until now.

Put it's still pretty bad form to use the "I was an X" argument. It's even worse when you do it like this!

[Suddenly]

Makes you wonder about those people who call in to Air America talk shows claiming "I've been a Republican all my life but I'm voting for Obama..."



I voted for Dole in 1996, and refused to vote for Bush in part because he is a ninny and in part because of what is reflected in the OP, the treatment of McCain in 2000. I was a McCain supporter. By 2004 I was convinced the GOP was at best a worthless cesspool of cynical pursuit of power by any means. Mainly this is the promotion of what I call "liberalphobia," the promotion of the idea that any liberal idea is wrong and dangerous and whimpy simply because it is labeled "liberal."

I'd always said I'd like to vote for McCain, but he has clearly sold his soul to this GOP machine for a chance at the oval office.

[Pookster]

So, I take it that the most obvious lie is that he wasn't a Republican that strongly supported McCain in 2000. While he seems to be exploiting his alleged switch in party loyalty, I don't see anything unusual in people switching parties. It happens quite often.

Obvious lie? Not really, but I could agree it stretches credulity a little because of the way it's being exploited.

[BPSCG]

Obvious lie? Not really, but I could agree it stretches credulity a little because of the way it's being exploited.Yeah, he went from being a McCain supporter in 2000 to being not just a Democrat, but chairman of the county Democratic committee.

Yeah, right. Pull the other one.

[Alric]

The most appaling lie or half-truth is to hear McCain pander to fundies while previously he was denouncing the influence of religions organizations in the GOP.

Now that is being two-faced.

[Suddenly]

Yeah, he went from being a McCain supporter in 2000 to being not just a Democrat, but chairman of the county Democratic committee.

Yeah, right. Pull the other one.

Hardly unlikely.

Those who are forced to take a look inside and switch opinions about something seen as important often become, for good or ill, fanatics about it.

Why this is, I don't know... but it is quite common.

[joobz]

Yeah, he went from being a McCain supporter in 2000 to being not just a Democrat, but chairman of the county Democratic committee.

Yeah, right. Pull the other one.
Not that it's the same thing, but my mom has been an active participant in the democratic party in her town for the past 25 years. She works the polls for the DNC, she attends the meetings, she helps out with all party related stuff. She's registered democrat.

However, she is also EXTREMELY pro-life and hasn't voted for a democrat for president since the 70s.

Only recently has she officially switched parties and is now working for the republicans.

[shemp]

Yeah, he went from being a McCain supporter in 2000 to being not just a Democrat, but chairman of the county Democratic committee.

Yeah, right. Pull the other one.

Maybe he's the only Democrat in the county?

[Nursefoxfire]

So is Joe Lieberman a liar too?

I don't understand how changing one's political stance over the course of eight years could be considered a lie, regardless of whether you're working in politics or are just Joe Citizen.

[Cleon]

Yeah, he went from being a McCain supporter in 2000 to being not just a Democrat, but chairman of the county Democratic committee.


I don't get what's hard to believe about this.

We're not talking about the heart of Philadelphia, here; the population of the entire county is only about 120,000, with only about 22,000 registered Democrats (compared to 44,000 Republicans).

This is small-town politics, here. In the Democratic party, when Democrats are outnumbered 2-1. Getting to a leadership position in this environment involves a three-stage process:

1. Getting involved.
2. Showing an interest.
3. Being asked.

[JoeTheJuggler]

Also, does the chair of the Lebanon County Democratic committee speak on behalf of the Obama campaign? Or were you talking about some other "campaign"?

The worst lie of the campaign has to be Palin's "thanks but no thanks" line.

[fishbob]

The Most Obvious Lie of the Campaign

Then you haven't been paying attention. That one is not even in the top 10.

[applecorped]

Then you haven't been paying attention. That one is not even in the top 10.

What is the top ten?

[Upchurch]

What is the top ten?
Let's give one from each side:

Palin saying "Thanks, but no thanks" to the bridge to nowhere or its funding.

Obama claiming McCain thinks earning under $5 million is "middle class".

[Upchurch]

Yeah, he went from being a McCain supporter in 2000 to being not just a Democrat, but chairman of the county Democratic committee.
In eight years.

In the past eight years, I've had four jobs, moved twice, got married, bought a rental property, became a farmer, quit grad school swearing I would never go back, went back to grad school, and, by the election, I will have become a father. A damn lot can happen in eight years and that was just the big stuff.

Don't forget that McCain was much, much more a moderate in 2000. He's shifted way to the right since then.

[BenBurch]

I was a Libertarian in 1999. It happens.

[Upchurch]

In less than eight years, I, as an atheist, joined a local UU church and nearly became a member of the board of trustees. (only my own good sense to say "No, thanks" kept it from actually happening.)

If a current atheist could become get on the governing board a church, why couldn't a Republican switch parties and work her way up to county chairman? Heck, the qualifications at that level probably include having a warm body and being interested in taking it on.

[BPSCG]

Wow. A sudden rash of broken BS meters here. When did all that vaunted skepticism get replaced by open credulity?

[geni]

Wow. A sudden rash of broken BS meters here. When did all that vaunted skepticism get replaced by open credulity?

No credulity just rational analysis. Your position is that they must be lying for this to be true it must be that one or more is the case:

1)it is imposible to change parties within 8 years
2)It is imposible to hold any position within a party haveing changed sides
3)It is imposible to talk about doing so


Nope of these are remotely credible so your complain would be that people are choseing to be skeptical over being cynical.

[BPSCG]

In less than eight years, I, as an atheist, joined a local UU church and nearly became a member of the board of trustees. (only my own good sense to say "No, thanks" kept it from actually happening.)

If a current atheist could become get on the governing board a church...Oh, come on. If you were to cast out all the atheists from any Unitarian church, you could hold Sunday services in a large minivan. :rolleyes:

[JCL]

Lets investigate...

According to his home town newspaper in 2006, via zoominfo...

http://www.zoominfo.com/people/Tarsa_Chris_622536178.aspx

Lebanon Daily News - Locally, party invigorated for...

Published on: 11/10/2006 Last Visited: 11/10/2006

Chris Tarsa, the Lebanon County Democratic Committee chairman, leaned against the wall in the party's tiny campaign headquarters on Willow Street Tuesday night, watching results come in with a satisfied smile on his face.
...

Tarsa, 39, is CEO of a family-owned business that makes surgical instruments. He is a former Republican and became Democratic Committee chairman only in June. He said the local campaign for Casey and Rendell helped to organize and energize the party, and he hopes to build on that momentum next year.


He is currently a Democrat, but at some point before 2006 he was a Republican.

Since November of 2006 until present his story is consistent. Looks like the last 8 years of republican leadership drove him to the democrats.

Was the Democrat Party was just laying the groundwork for this two years ago, the sneaky devils.

This was the biggest lie you could find?

I don’t think you are trying.

[dudalb]

The most appaling lie or half-truth is to hear McCain pander to fundies while previously he was denouncing the influence of religions organizations in the GOP.

Now that is being two-faced.


That is a main reason I have decided to vote for Obama, although I changed party registration back in 2000 specifically so I could vote for McCain in the GOP primaries.
But that having been said, all these "I have been a Lifelong Republican but I am voting for Obama" calls coming in to liberal Talk shows and showing up on Democratic websites are pretty damn suspcious.
The fact is both sides have pretty much decided that anything is justified to get their man elected. If this becomes a permanent feature of US elections, then Democracy is doomed. Sooner or late one or the other party will make the ultimate decision, and decide that force is justifed to defeat the other side.

[Suddenly]

Wow. A sudden rash of broken BS meters here. When did all that vaunted skepticism get replaced by open credulity?

Roughly about the same time your arguments from incredulity became valid.

This is all you have here. You don't believe it could happen based solely on what? Nothing but your belief that it couldn't.

Now you call those that don't share your incredulity as non-skeptical.


You are better than this.

[WildCat]

Lets investigate...

According to his home town newspaper in 2006, via zoominfo...

http://www.zoominfo.com/people/Tarsa_Chris_622536178.aspx



He is currently a Democrat, but at some point before 2006 he was a Republican.

Since November of 2006 until present his story is consistent. Looks like the last 8 years of republican leadership drove him to the democrats.
The first reference I can find of him on the lebanondemocrats web site via the Wayback Machine is late in 2005 (http://web.archive.org/web/20051029211136/www.lebanondemocrats.com/party.htm), further confirming his story does appear legitimate.

Where he messed up was saying he is a Republican, rather than a former Republican which could well just have been sloppy writing of the sort we see all the time here.

[BenBurch]

Suddenly has it right. This is a classic argument from incredulity, and is obviously intentionally resorted to only because they have nothing better. And I say intentionally because they are too smart to do it without realizing it.

[Cleon]

Where he messed up was saying he is a Republican, rather than a former Republican which could well just have been sloppy writing of the sort we see all the time here.

Well, the phrase he used was "As a Republican and strong McCain supporter in 2000," so I suppose "in 2000" could modify "as a Republican" just as much as "strong McCain supporter." Still sloppy writing, though.

[PitPat]

Where he messed up was saying he is a Republican, rather than a former Republican which could well just have been sloppy writing of the sort we see all the time here.

I agree, I think his implication that he is a current Republican was deliberate, and he had plenty of opportunities to clarify his current affiliation. Still I have a hard time getting all worked up about it, just politics as usual -- it's ultimately just another ranting to a newspaper editor. And if we're including operatives/surrogates as lie generators, I would probably take this out of the running as most obvious lie, if it is indeed, at least by denotative definition of Tarsa's words, a lie. Sounds like he just chose his words carefully to be deceptive, but left room to technically wiggle out of it if caught.

Which is another thing that's sorta strange...if you're the chair of the county Dem Committee and write a letter to its largest newspaper, how could you not think it's gonna go unnoticed?

[Upchurch]

When did all that vaunted skepticism get replaced by open credulity?
Fair enough. Let's approach this skeptically.

Within an eight year span, Joe Lieberman went from being the Democratic Vice Presidential nominee to being a contender for Republican Vice Presidential nominee. At the very least, he appeared at the Republican National Convention to promote the Republican nominee. That is far more of a jump than Tarsa is claiming to have made, so Tarsa's claim is certainly plausible.

What evidence do you have that Tarsa is lying? Your claim appears to be predicated on the assumption that no one could go from being a Republican and strong McCain supporter to being the chairman of the Lebanon County Democratic Committee in only eight short years. Do you have anything to support that assumption, especially in light of Joe Lieberman's own well-documented political movement?

[Pookster]

Yeah, he went from being a McCain supporter in 2000 to being not just a Democrat, but chairman of the county Democratic committee.

Yeah, right. Pull the other one.


At the moment, you don't seem to have a leg to stand on, much less one to pull. Other than your argument from incredulity, what else do you have to support this being the most obvious lie of the campaign?

[JCL]

The first reference I can find of him on the lebanondemocrats web site via the Wayback Machine is late in 2005 (http://web.archive.org/web/20051029211136/www.lebanondemocrats.com/party.htm), further confirming his story does appear legitimate.

Where he messed up was saying he is a Republican, rather than a former Republican which could well just have been sloppy writing of the sort we see all the time here.

Guess that depends on how you read:

"As a Republican and strong McCain supporter in 2000..."

1: In 2000, he was a republican and McCain supporter

2: He is a Republican now and was a McCain supporter in 2000

My brain came up with option 1 when I first read it.

All in all not the most obvious lie, I would think the most obvious lie would not be in the Lebanon News, but on a more national stage.

So two problems,

Might not be a lie, and (if it is a lie) not the most obvious lie.

[President Bush]

I think we all quite know through and through how it must certainly be altogether apparent to clearly anybody with any sense at all that BPSCG is obviously right in toto. I mean it's not like Ronald Reagan would have ever switched parties.

[chipmunk stew]

The Most Stupidest Thread of the Campaign

[Upchurch]

Hey, why is this thread here, anyway? It isn't really about the election or either campaign.

[Darth Rotor]

So is Joe Lieberman a liar too?

Yes. Why did you have to ask?

He's a Senator.

QED.

[Darth Rotor]

The Most Obvious Lie of the Campaign
. . . hasn't been told yet.

All this premature exasperation is a sign of overly sensitive pols. :cool:

[Nursefoxfire]

Yes. Why did you have to ask?

He's a Senator.

QED.

Ok, that got a laugh out of me :)

You sound like my dad, who swears that no elected official in a position higher than, say, dog-catcher, is an honorable person, because the nature of the electoral process means they'd have to lie and do back-room dealings in order to get to their elected position (the only exception, he felt, was Jimmy Carter).

[JoeTheJuggler]

So two problems,

Might not be a lie, and (if it is a lie) not the most obvious lie.

I would add a third: it's not really a lie (if it is a lie) of the campaign. I'd limit that to lies coming from the principles of the campaigns (or their spokespeople).

McCain's campaign doesn't see it that way. They seem to think if anyone tells a whopper about him or Palin, Obama's campaign (or Obama himself) must somehow be behind it (http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/mccain-palin_distorts_our_finding.html).

[Darth Rotor]

Ok, that got a laugh out of me :)

You sound like my dad, who swears that no elected official in a position higher than, say, dog-catcher, is an honorable person, because the nature of the electoral process means they'd have to lie and do back-room dealings in order to get to their elected position (the only exception, he felt, was Jimmy Carter).

Yeah, it's a matter of degree. Is the prospective elected official 2 percent crook, or 92 percent crook? That's what one has to figure out.

DR

[Slayhamlet]

Silly thread.

[Pookster]

The Most Stupidest Thread of the Campaign


Lipstick won't help this thread either.

[Puppycow]

Yeah, he went from being a McCain supporter in 2000 to being not just a Democrat, but chairman of the county Democratic committee.

Yeah, right. Pull the other one.

I've heard of strnager things than that. If he supported McCain in 2000 rather than Bush, he was probably a moderate republican to begin with. Then the Bush presidency and fiasco in Iraq, etc. Is this more of an evolution than McCain himself? Or Romney (who went from being a republican liberal enough to win in the bluest state of the union to the heir-apparant of the Bush wing of the republican party)?

[BPSCG]

Okay.

I'll acknowledge Tarsa's first sentence can be read either of two ways, e.g., that he's saying he is a Republican, and supported John McCain in 2000, or that he was a Republican in 2000 and supported McCain then.

I'll even acknowledge that he may well have actually been a Republican in 2000, without going Clausian and demanding to see certified copies of the voter registrations from that year.

However...

If you take out the line at the end that the newspaper apparently appended to his signature, stating that he is the county Democratic chairman, what do you have left?

You have a letter from someone advertising Republican bona fides, who does not mention that he has switched parties, or that he is actively working against the Republicans this year. Leave out the appended info at the end, and he sounds like just another average Joe, just another one of those people who claim, "I've been a Republican all my life but I'm voting for Obama."

Why does he claim to be - or to have been - a Republican, but hide the fact that he is a Democratic leader in his community. Is he embarrassed to be a Democrat?

Or is he trying to make people think he represents some sort of grass-roots movement, when he does nothing of the kind?

This is astroturfing - disguising your biased political agenda as spontaneous grass-roots behavior.

[Pookster]

If you take out the line at the end that the newspaper apparently appended to his signature, stating that he is the county Democratic chairman, what do you have left?


A letter to the editor in a local newspaper in an area where he is probably well known from a political standpoint?

Dude, you're trying waaaaaay too hard with this.

[Upchurch]

If you take out the line at the end that the newspaper apparently appended to his signature, stating that he is the county Democratic chairman, what do you have left?

{snip}

Why does he claim to be - or to have been - a Republican, but hide the fact that he is a Democratic leader in his community.
If you ignore the fact that he states he is a Democratic leader in his community, why is he hiding the fact that he is a Democratic leader in his community?

:boggled:

[Upchurch]

I finally googled "Christopher Tarsa Lebanon". I found several pages worth of hits basically saying the same thing Beeps parroted in OP.

[BPSCG]

If you ignore the fact that he states he is a Democratic leader in his community, why is he hiding the fact that he is a Democratic leader in his community?

:boggled:Where does he state it? The fact that the disclaimer comes after his signature indicates that the newspaper inserted it.

He was trying to suggest he was Joe Average Republican, like so "many of the ordinary Republicans I talk to."

[Upchurch]

Where does he state it? The fact that the disclaimer comes after his signature indicates that the newspaper inserted it.
Okay, does anything indicate he was trying to hide it?

He was trying to suggest he was Joe Average Republican, like so "many of the ordinary Republicans I talk to."
But he didn't say he was "like so 'many of the the ordinary Republicans I talk to.'" And who knows? Maybe he was.
I talk politics with a lot of people from all walks of life. I find it compelling that many of the ordinary Republicans I talk to understand that their families cannot afford another four years like the last eight. We all deserve better.
Maybe this should be labeled The Most Obvious Group Think Reaction of the Campaign.

[rjwould]

The Most Obvious Lie of the CampaignThat John McCain is a dignified person...

[Snide]

So is Joe Lieberman a liar too?

I don't understand how changing one's political stance over the course of eight years could be considered a lie, regardless of whether you're working in politics or are just Joe Citizen.Norm Coleman comes to mind for me.

[chipmunk stew]

A letter to the editor in a local newspaper in an area where he is probably well known from a political standpoint?

Dude, you're trying waaaaaay too hard with this.
The Most Dead-on Post of the Thread